Noncontrast Magnetic Resonance Lymphography

Abstract

Background Different imaging techniques have been used for the investigation of the lymphatic channels and lymph glands. Noncontrast magnetic resonance (MR) lymphography has significant advantages in comparison with other imaging modalities.

Methods Noncontrast MR lymphography uses very heavily T2-weighted fast spin echo sequences which obtain a nearly complete signal loss in tissue background and specific display of lymphatic vessels with a long T2 relaxation time. The raw data can be processed with different algorithms such as maximum intensity projection algorithm to obtain an anatomic representation.

Results Standard T2-weighted MR images easily demonstrate the location of edema. It appears as subcutaneous infiltration of soft tissue with a classical honeycomb pattern. True collection around the muscular area may be demonstrated in case of severe lymphedema. Lymph nodes may be normal in size, number, and signal intensity; in other cases, lymph nodes may be smaller in size or number of lymph nodes may be restricted. MR lymphography allows a classification of lymphedema in aplasia (no collecting vessels demonstrated); hypoplasia (a small number of lymphatic vessels), and numerical hyperplasia or hyperplasia (with an increased number of lymphatic vessels of greater and abnormal diameter).

Conclusion Noncontrast MR lymphography is a unique noninvasive imaging modality for the diagnosis of lymphedema. It can be used for positive diagnosis, differential diagnosis, and specific evaluation of lymphedema severity. It may also be used for follow-up evaluation after treatment.

Keywords

lymphatics - lymphedema - MR imaging - MR lymphography

• References

• 1 Browse N, Burnaud KG, Mortimer PS. Diseases of the lymphatics. Arnold, London; 2003
• 2 Witte CL, Witte MH, Unger EC , et al. Advances in imaging of lymph flow disorders. Radiographics 2000; 20 (6) 1697-1719
• 3 Kinmonth JB, Taylor GW, Tracy GD, Marsh JD. Primary lymphoedema; clinical and lymphangiographic studies of a series of 107 patients in which the lower limbs were affected. Br J Surg 1957; 45 (189) 1-9
• 4 Koehler PR. Complications of lymphography. Lymphology 1968; 1 (4) 116-120
• 5 Vaughan BF. CT of swollen legs. Clin Radiol 1990; 41 (1) 24-30
• 6 Suresh S, Kumaraswami V, Suresh I , et al. Ultrasonographic diagnosis of subclinical filariasis. J Ultrasound Med 1997; 16 (1) 45-49
• 7 Weissleder H, Weissleder R. Lymphedema: evaluation of qualitative and quantitative lymphoscintigraphy in 238 patients. Radiology 1988; 167 (3) 729-735
• 8 Case TC, Witte CL, Witte MH, Unger EC, Williams WH. Magnetic resonance imaging in human lymphedema: comparison with lymphangioscintigraphy. Magn Reson Imaging 1992; 10 (4) 549-558
• 9 Weissleder R, Elizondo G, Wittenberg J, Lee AS, Josephson L, Brady TJ. Ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide: an intravenous contrast agent for assessing lymph nodes with MR imaging. Radiology 1990; 175 (2) 494-498
• 10 Lohrmann C, Foeldi E, Speck O, Langer M. High-resolution MR lymphangiography in patients with primary and secondary lymphedema. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187 (2) 556-561
• 11 Ferrucci JT. Advances in abdominal MR imaging. Radiographics 1998; 18 (6) 1569-1586
• 12 Arrivé L, Azizi L, Lewin M , et al. MR lymphography of abdominal and retroperitoneal lymphatic vessels. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 189 (5) 1051-1058
• 13 Arrivé L, Coudray C, Azizi L , et al. Pineapple juice as a negative oral contrast agent in magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography [in French]. J Radiol 2007; 88 (11, Pt 1) 1689-1694
• 14 El Mouhadi S, Arrivé L. Magnetic resonance lymphography of chyluria. Kidney Int 2010; 78 (7) 712